People want to shoot p24.
I’m sure some people do. Some people want to eat detergent pods to garner likes on social media.
The question is, how many want to shoot p24, and for what fraction of the global market does that desire represent a critical factor in the decision of whether or not to buy a particular camera? It’s a rhetorical question, you don’t have a clue as to the answer. However, it’s fairly likely that Canon does.
Just because he doesn't realize what can be done with p24 content and where it's used doesn't invalidate the point.
That’s basically what he asked — what can be done with p24 content that can’t be done with other frame rates? Are you unwilling to provide an answer to that question, or unable?
The point being made by several people boils down to viewing. If one is shooting footage to be used in a cinematic production shown in theaters, it seems reasonable to adhere to the established standard p24. Do you really think that cinematic productions are a majority use case for people buying Canon digital cameras? LOL.
Far more likely that people are going to watch footage they shoot on their own televisions. Those televisions typically offer frame interpolation (called different things by various manufacturers, TruMotion, AutoMotion, MotionFlow, etc.) that boosts p24 content to 60/120/240 fps, matching the refresh rate of the panel. Sure, there are technogeeks out there who will wade into the advanced menu settings and turn the feature off, to ‘experience the pure cinematography of 24 fps’ or some such, but I suspect most people don’t bother, and of course Canon’s target market is ‘most people’.
But I’m not a video guy, so I’ll pose the question again: in the context of viewing footage at home, what are the advantages of shooting in p24 and what can be done that is impossible to achieve with another frame rate?
Every camera reviewer should be loudly and proudly ridiculing Canon from the rooftops for such crippling...
So why aren’t they? Is it because they’re ‘sucking up’ as you suggest? Or could it be this issue has far more prominence in your own mind than it does in the real world?
This is why all of Canon's competitors offer p24 capability in their cameras. Their potential customers want it and they offer it. Canon's potential customers want it, but Canon only sees lost Cx00 sales.
All of Canon’s competitors offer it. Canon sells more digital cameras and more ILCs than any of their competitors...in fact, last year they sold more than their nearest two or three competitors (depending on segment) combined, bolstered by a ~4% increase market share. If you have some grasp of logic, those facts should tell you something about the importance of p24 video to the broader stills market.
Note that Canon’s consumer camcorders seem to shoot p24, from their current releases to at least as far back as my Vixia HF M41 from 2011. But as far as the stills market, the available evidence indicates that p24 is essentially irrelevant, despite your hyperbole about its apparent importance.